P5+1 and Iran agree landmark nuclear deal at Geneva talks

Why does Iran needs long range ballistic missiles capable of delivering a nuclear payload if their program is peaceful?

Even Iran has a Right to self defence, (including Mutually Assured Destruction), this is especially relevant considering their close and not so close neighbours and their reputation as to obeying International law and United Nations Security Council resolutions, not to mention the almost endless list of Human Rights abuses.
 
Last edited:
I am not sure why people struggle to understand the concept that Iran has a right to self defence, as I have pointed out previously they do not appear to be a threat to the world in terms of aggression (they have not invaded anyone) , there is little doubt that they are playing politics and meddling in other nations politics but who isn't (the yanks and poms are spying on everyone and everything and have actively backed the overthrow of democratically elected governments all for the sake of ideology) so I can't really hold Iran to a separate standard there.

They are based in a very volatile region with Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan on their borders with Saudi Arabia and Israel not far away and none of whom can be trusted as far as they can be thrown.

So why wouldn't they want all the defensive capability they can get their hands on?
 
I am not sure why people struggle to understand the concept that Iran has a right to self defence, as I have pointed out previously they do not appear to be a threat to the world in terms of aggression (they have not invaded anyone) , there is little doubt that they are playing politics and meddling in other nations politics but who isn't (the yanks and poms are spying on everyone and everything and have actively backed the overthrow of democratically elected governments all for the sake of ideology) so I can't really hold Iran to a separate standard there.

They are based in a very volatile region with Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan on their borders with Saudi Arabia and Israel not far away and none of whom can be trusted as far as they can be thrown.

So why wouldn't they want all the defensive capability they can get their hands on?
I've seen other Libs say that soverign nations have a right to self defence so what's the problem? Flys in the face of 60 or so years of bipartisan (here in the US) and international support of limiting the spread of nukes around the world. The fact of a little butt pimple like N. Korea threatening the US with a strike should be an excellent example of why not. Iran hasn't displayed territorial ambitions, perhaps because of military embargoes, maybe they learned something from the 1st Gulf War. However they have been militarily involved elsewhere through suragate like Hezbollah.
 
I've seen other Libs say that soverign nations have a right to self defence so what's the problem? Flys in the face of 60 or so years of bipartisan (here in the US) and international support of limiting the spread of nukes around the world. The fact of a little butt pimple like N. Korea threatening the US with a strike should be an excellent example of why not. Iran hasn't displayed territorial ambitions, perhaps because of military embargoes, maybe they learned something from the 1st Gulf War. However they have been militarily involved elsewhere through suragate like Hezbollah.

I think your problem is that you cant see the forest for the trees the argument to limit nuclear weapons is less about what is good for the world and more about what is better for you, lets be perfectly clear here American (the rest of the world is the same) foreign policy isn't looking out for me it is looking out for you.

If Iran was say Israel or any other nation allied to the US cause you wouldn't hear boo about sanctions at the UN and if someone dared raise them you would be decrying the UN for being anti-freedom, anti-American threatening vetos on everything proposed.

As for North Korea, anyone that takes them seriously is just as idiotic as they are because there is one thing I have come to believe about nukes, those who have them know that to use them will lead to their mutual destruction and much like cockroaches politicians and world leaders have no intention of dying for any cause or ideology.

They are a weapon that guarantees they wont be invaded not an offensive weapon.
 
Why does Iran needs long range ballistic missiles capable of delivering a nuclear payload if their program is peaceful?
Iran's longest range missile is 2500kM so we don't have very long range missiles. In fact we don't need it now. But we have good plans for space field and we want it because we need it and it is our right. Also we are planing to have our first base in antarctic, maybe a few months or one year later, and it is our right too.
 
Last edited:
In theory, this sounds great. I am eagerly awaiting what it will be like in practice though, who knows what will happen. This whole "interpretation" thing is possibly a hint to that, but overall I feel positive about the deal.

The inevitable power balance shift is great. Israel and it's proxy state the US is currently a bit too full of themselves.
 
To be honest I don't see this agreement as all that important it is the next one that will determine the outcome of this process.

If Iran is smart it will abide by the current agreement and enter into negotiations for the final one as soon as possible this will limit the amount of posturing and interference from the likes of Israel and Saudi Arabia and as long as they play by the current rules it will be almost impossible not to reach an agreement no matter what roadblocks are thrown in the way.

For Iran this period is all about them proving they are not a threat, Europe is relatively open minded on the issue and both China and Russia will pretty much back anything that keeps Iran out of the US sphere of influence.
 
From the three countries (Iran , Israel and Saudi Arabia) only one threatens to destroy another country (Iran wants the destruction of Israel).

From the three countries only one supports terrorism. (Iran supports many religious fanatics. They were caught red handed several times)

From the three countries only one is fighting war through proxies (Iran supports Hezbollah and Hamas)

From the three countries only one ratified the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and violated it by developing a nuclear program in secret: Iran

The deal is in violation of several UNSC resolutions.

From the three countries only one still violates many UNSC resolutions: Iran
Security Council Resolution 1696 (2006) : suspend its enrichment program
Security Council Resolution 1737 (2006) : failure to comply with Resolution 1696
Security Council Resolution 1747 (2007) : failure to comply with the previous two resolutions
Security Council Resolution 1803 (2008) : as a response to Iran’s decision not to comply with any of the previous resolutions. Urges Iran to comply with the IAEA.
Security Council Resolution 1835 (2008) : reaffirms the four previous resolutions.
Security Council Resolution 1929 (2010) : demands from previous resolutions that Iran halt all enrichment activity and other activities related to nuclear weapons development.

From the three countries only one violates a weapons embargo : Iran

KAHLILI: Rouhani’s Iranian nuclear deception
(Reza Kahlili is a pseudonym for a former CIA operative in Iran’s Revolutionary Guards and author of “A Time to Betray” (Simon & Schuster, 2010))
 
I was planning on answering to your post but I get the feeling it's pointless.

I wish you a good day.


A wise choice.

As per usual he has managed to read only the sections he wants to read and over looked that Saudi Arabia is supporting rebels in Syria, Israel is born of terrorism, probably the leading nation in international assassinations and routinely ignores UN censure or relies on the US to veto it, Iran only threatened to destroy Israel if attacked and that the NPT does not prevent a nation researching nuclear technology for civilian use (not to mention that it is something that can be withdrawn from anyway).

But hey why let open-mindedness get in the way of an ideological rant.
 
I was planning on answering to your post but I get the feeling it's pointless.

I wish you a good day.

Thanks

A wise choice.

As per usual he has managed to read only the sections he wants to read and over looked that Saudi Arabia is supporting rebels in Syria, Israel is born of terrorism, probably the leading nation in international assassinations and routinely ignores UN censure or relies on the US to veto it, Iran only threatened to destroy Israel if attacked and that the NPT does not prevent a nation researching nuclear technology for civilian use (not to mention that it is something that can be withdrawn from anyway).

But hey why let open-mindedness get in the way of an ideological rant.

in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

Iran's Nuclear Deal Faces Big Test

David Albright, a former IAEA inspector, notes that the agency has also been denied access to an Iranian military base where nuclear weapons work was suspected.

"There [are] other sites the IAEA has identified that are allegedly related to past nuclear weapon activities," he says. "There [are] many people the IAEA has asked to see that they've been unable to interview. There [are] documents they want from Iran."

But Olli Heinonen, formerly at the IAEA and now at Harvard, doubts that there will be any progress on the weaponization issues for at least six months — and that's not good, he says.​

Iran already won. They urgently needed money to support their proxies and their nuclear research. They got some of the money (billions of dollars) and will get more for at least the next 6 months. Rohani is an expert in dragging his feet, the IAEA knows that.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQFK0Gl6tns"]Reza Khalili: Revealed! Evidence Iran crossed nuclear 'red line' - March 20, 2013 - YouTube[/ame]
 
My suggestion: Iranian, don't talk any bullsh1t with P5, developed nukes as you please,it is your privilige. Nukes are the truth.
 

John Stewart is great. Love his shows.

About the sanctions, one important aspect was missing, they would only be activated in case Iran didn't abide by the agreement.

Another problem is that some parts in the 5+1 agreement are secret. Even congress does not know what was left out of the document they got. So far for the "transparency" policy of Obama.

More problems :the IAEA is not allowed to inspect the sites where weapons work is believed to have occurred, because they belong to the military.

And more problems: most of the oil income goes to the Republican Guards. That means that most of the $4.2 billion (oil revenues frozen in offshore accounts) released will go to the military.
 

I am not so certain they will be winds of change but from a Western point of view a cyclone of change, I honestly do not think Israel understands just how sick of war the public in the west are (Obama's Syrian debarcle has shown this) and its constant sabre rattling over Iran has shown it for what it is, a nation that will get and do what it wants no matter what it costs the USA.

With luck these negotiations will work out for everyone in the region but I suspect the biggest winner in all of this may be the Palestinian cause, however it will require Iran doing what it agrees to do and that may be a problem if there is such gap between the civilian and religious factions.
 
We can only argue about how it will unfold. Too get the truth we'll have to wait 6 months. You believe it is all OK and I think it is not. One of us will be right and I hope it will be you but I'm very sceptical for the following reasons:

- Khamenei has the real power, not Rouhani.
- Iran is in a terrible financial state, they desperately need money for their war in Syria.
- they cannot allow for Sadat to fall and when they can't support him and Hezbollah anymore the rebels will prevail.
- 40% of the economy is in the hands of the republican guards.
- Nuclear enrichment has to be suspended, not stopped so they can start again.
- the IAEA is not allowed to visit the military installations which they suspect are working on nuclear weapons and delivery systems.

They will find a way within 6 months to cancel the agreement and blame it on the west. They know Obama's red lines don't mean a thing. The threat is from Israel and some Arab countries.

No matter how it turns out, good or bad, there will be a big change coming within 6 months.
 
We can only argue about how it will unfold. Too get the truth we'll have to wait 6 months. You believe it is all OK and I think it is not. One of us will be right and I hope it will be you but I'm very sceptical for the following reasons:

- Khamenei has the real power, not Rouhani.
- Iran is in a terrible financial state, they desperately need money for their war in Syria.
- they cannot allow for Sadat to fall and when they can't support him and Hezbollah anymore the rebels will prevail.
- 40% of the economy is in the hands of the republican guards.
- Nuclear enrichment has to be suspended, not stopped so they can start again.
- the IAEA is not allowed to visit the military installations which they suspect are working on nuclear weapons and delivery systems.

They will find a way within 6 months to cancel the agreement and blame it on the west. They know Obama's red lines don't mean a thing. The threat is from Israel and some Arab countries.

No matter how it turns out, good or bad, there will be a big change coming within 6 months.
your claims could be true if Iran was really looking for nukes but Iran isn't. Iran just wants nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.
 
your claims could be true if Iran was really looking for nukes but Iran isn't. Iran just wants nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.

I believe you but I do not trust your government. I hope I have to change my mind in 6 months.
 
your claims could be true if Iran was really looking for nukes but Iran isn't. Iran just wants nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.

This was posted in The Economist this morning, I think it is fairly accurate...

obama_zps358d592e.jpg


Funny thing is that it appears to have been withdrawn.
 
Back
Top